EBS和EFS之间的主要区别在于，EBS只能从特定AWS区域中的单个EC2实例访问，而EFS允许跨多个区域和实例挂载文件系统。

最后，Amazon S3是一个善于存储大量备份或用户文件的对象存储。

修正比较:

S3是一种在任何地方都可以访问的存储设施 EBS是可以挂载到EC2上的设备 EFS是一个可以同时挂载到多个EC2实例上的文件系统

在这一点上，比较EFS和EBS还为时过早——EFS的性能还不知道，可靠性也不知道。

为什么要使用S3?

对于一个或多个EC2实例，您不需要文件是“本地”的。 (有效地)无限容量 内置web服务，身份验证

答案:D

1 GB存储在US-East-1: (更新至2016年12月20日)

冰川:0.004美元/月(注:2016年大幅降价) S3: 0.023美元/月 S3-IA(2015年9月公布): $0.0125/月(+$0.01/gig检索费用) EBS: $0.045-0.1/月(取决于速度- SSD与否)+ IOPS成本 EFS: 0.3美元/月

进一步的存储选项，可用于在处理数据时/之前临时存储数据:

SNS SQS 运动流 DynamoDB, SimpleDB

以上成本仅为样本。不同地区之间可能存在差异，并且在任何时候都可能发生变化。此外，数据传输(到互联网上)还需要额外的费用。然而，它们显示了服务价格之间的比率。

这些服务之间有很多区别:

EFS 是：

Generally Available (out of preview), but may not yet be available in your region Network filesystem (that means it may have bigger latency but it can be shared across several instances; even between regions) It is expensive compared to EBS (~10x more) but it gives extra features. It's a highly available service. It's a managed service You can attach the EFS storage to an EC2 Instance Can be accessed by multiple EC2 instances simultaneously Since 2016.dec.20 it's possible to attach your EFS storage directly to on-premise servers via Direct Connect. ()

EBS是:

A block storage (so you need to format it). This means you are able to choose which type of file system you want. As it's a block storage, you can use Raid 1 (or 0 or 10) with multiple block storages It is really fast It is relatively cheap With the new announcements from Amazon, you can store up to 16TB data per storage on SSD-s. You can snapshot an EBS (while it's still running) for backup reasons But it only exists in a particular region. Although you can migrate it to another region, you cannot just access it across regions (only if you share it via the EC2; but that means you have a file server) You need an EC2 instance to attach it to New feature (2017.Feb.15): You can now increase volume size, adjust performance, or change the volume type while the volume is in use. You can continue to use your application while the change takes effect.

S3是:

An object store (not a file system). You can store files and "folders" but can't have locks, permissions etc like you would with a traditional file system This means, by default you can't just mount S3 and use it as your webserver But it's perfect for storing your images and videos for your website Great for short term archiving (e.g. a few weeks). It's good for long term archiving too, but Glacier is more cost efficient. Great for storing logs You can access the data from every region (extra costs may apply) Highly Available, Redundant. Basically data loss is not possible (99.999999999% durability, 99.9 uptime SLA) Much cheaper than EBS. You can serve the content directly to the internet, you can even have a full (static) website working direct from S3, without an EC2 instance

冰川是:

长期存档存储 储存非常便宜 回收可能非常昂贵 “回读”你的数据需要4个小时(所以只存储你知道你在很长一段时间内不需要检索的项目)

正如JDL的评论中提到的，在定价方面有几个有趣的方面。例如，Glacier、S3、EFS根据您的使用情况为您分配存储，而在EBS，您需要预先定义分配的存储。也就是说，你需要高估。(然而，向EBS卷添加更多存储是很容易的，这需要一些工程，这意味着您总是“多付”EBS存储，这使得它更加昂贵。)

来源:AWS存储更新-新的低成本S3存储选项和冰川降价

EBS和EFS之间的主要区别在于，EBS只能从特定AWS区域中的单个EC2实例访问，而EFS允许跨多个区域和实例挂载文件系统。

最后，Amazon S3是一个善于存储大量备份或用户文件的对象存储。

简单地说

Amazon EBS提供块级存储。

Amazon EFS提供网络连接的共享文件存储。

Amazon S3提供对象存储功能。

EBS是简单的块级存储，可以连接到来自相同AZ的实例，并且可以不受实例寿命的影响而存活。

但是，EFS和S3之间存在有趣的区别，并为其确定适当的用例。

成本:EFS的成本大约是S3的10倍。

可变性:

当我们有数千个需要同时处理文件的实例时，建议EFS优于S3。 还要注意，S3是基于对象的存储，而EFS是基于文件的存储，这意味着只要我们需要不断更新文件(刷新)，我们就应该使用EFS。 S3是最终一致的，而EFS是强一致的。如果您无法提供最终的一致性，您应该使用EFS